Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33404851›Full record

ArticleVirchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology2021

The implementation of a commercially available multi-gene profile test for breast cancer characterization in a department of pathology: what have we learned from the first 100 cases?

Cristina Pelliccia, Emanuele Caselli, Martina Mandarano, Rachele Del Sordo, Guido Bellezza, Angelo Sidoni

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 55% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Cristina Pelliccia *Department of Experimental Medicine, Section of Anatomic Pathology and Histology, Medical School, University of Perugia, P.le Menghini 1, Perugia, 06129, Italy.
Emanuele Caselli *Department of Experimental Medicine, Section of Anatomic Pathology and Histology, Medical School, University of Perugia, P.le Menghini 1, Perugia, 06129, Italy.
Martina MandaranoDepartment of Experimental Medicine, Section of Anatomic Pathology and Histology, Medical School, University of Perugia, P.le Menghini 1, Perugia, 06129, Italy. martina.mandarano@collaboratori.unipg.it.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5019-4825
Rachele Del SordoDepartment of Experimental Medicine, Section of Anatomic Pathology and Histology, Medical School, University of Perugia, P.le Menghini 1, Perugia, 06129, Italy.
Guido BellezzaDepartment of Experimental Medicine, Section of Anatomic Pathology and Histology, Medical School, University of Perugia, P.le Menghini 1, Perugia, 06129, Italy.
Angelo SidoniDepartment of Experimental Medicine, Section of Anatomic Pathology and Histology, Medical School, University of Perugia, P.le Menghini 1, Perugia, 06129, Italy.
University of Perugia · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Analysis of breast cancer prognostic and predictive factors is still nowadays poorly accurate and standardized. The advent of multi-gene expression profiles (MGEPs) has improved the prediction of breast cancer outcome, particularly regarding early luminal breast cancers (LBCs). The availability in our Institute of EndoPredict® (EP), a last-generation prognostic gene signature assay, has prompted us to study a series of LBCs, firstly verifying its reproducibility on six routine representative cases, either presenting non-optimal preanalytical conditions or different tumor samples from the same patient; secondly, correlating EP results on 8 retrospectively recruited samples with patients' follow-up; thirdly, applying prospectively EP on 100 routinely diagnosed cases, assessing the oncologists' and pathologists' attitude toward it. The complete reproducibility of EP on all the samples investigated in the first phase allowed to state that EP overcomes the detrimental effects of an inaccurate pre-analytic phase, determining the most appropriate prognostic and predictive parameters of breast cancer. The second phase confirmed EP as a fundamental tool in guiding therapeutic decision, improving the classical bio-pathological characterization and recovering 38% patients' inadequately managed. Finally, the study disclosed how oncologists sometimes inadequately requested EP, but also how it allows a better stratification of breast cancer otherwise considered poorly aggressive and not requiring an EP test, such as G1 neoplasms or tubular histotype. In conclusion, the introduction of EP test in an Anatomic Pathology Department emerges as a useful tool in routine breast cancer diagnosis, both for the characterization of individual cases and, as a result, for more appropriate therapeutic choices.

Indexed as

Gene Expression ProfilingAdultAgedBreast NeoplasmsFemaleGenetic TestingHumansMiddle AgedPrognosisReceptors, EstrogenReproducibility of ResultsRisk FactorsReceptors, EstrogenAdjuvant chemotherapyBreast cancerEndocrine therapyEndoPredict®Multi-gene expression profilingPersonalized medicine

Identifiers

PMID33404851
OpenAlexW3120793460

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.